MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979131215 · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1633778

Reliability and Correlation with Quality of Life Outcomes of Unified Visual Function Scale

2018· article· en· W2979131215 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull Base · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Perception and Purchasing Behavior
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual fieldVisual acuityPerspective (graphical)Scale (ratio)Reliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceFunction (biology)Quality of life (healthcare)Field (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMedicineOptometrySurgeryOphthalmologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Historically, descriptions of visual acuity and visual field change following intracranial procedures have been very rudimentary. Clinicians and researchers have often used basic descriptions such as "improved," "worsened," and "unchanged" to describe outcomes following resections of tumors affecting the optic apparatus. These descriptors are vague, difficult to quantify, and are challenging to apply in a clinical perspective. We present a novel way to describe a patient's visual function as a combination of visual acuity and visual field assessment—Unified Visual Function Scale (UVFS). It is simple to use and can be used by surgeons, and researchers to gauge visual outcomes following tumor resection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it